Re: [boost] Re: A class template for an N-dimensional generic resizable array

From: Jeremy Siek (jsiek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-07 21:28:58

I agree that both Fortran order and C order should be supported. The
reason is that interfacing with F77 is important, and no one wants to have
to make copies of the entire array merely to change the storage order.
Also, some algorithms are more efficient on column-major arrays.

We should probably just steal how Blitz++ handles this issue. It has a
"GeneralArrayStorage" class that can be used to specify how the storage is
layed out.

On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Randy Roberts wrote:
> Some of us do alot of interfacing with old F77 or newer F90 code.
> An **intrinsic** FORTRAN-order for the actual array class would
> probably
> be more efficient, especially since we would need a raw pointer to the
> data in contiguous FORTRAN-order.  Therefore, I propose that the array
> class be templated on a policy parameter dictating the intrinsic
> ordering
> of the data.
> 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Jeremy Siek                        www: http://www.lsc.nd.edu/~jsiek/
 Ph.D. Candidate                  email: jsiek_at_[hidden]
 Univ. of Notre Dame         work phone: [phone]
----------------------------------------------------------------------